Ideas for Gentoo Website

Message

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Sun Nov 30, 2008 12:18 am

I was thinking about the Gentoo website, and how it can actually be quite hard to navigate if you don't know where things are. I'd like to suggest making it better through some simple restructuring of the hierarchy of pages. The following list contains all the navigation links on the current website, just rearranged.

I would suggest that only links directly below the level are displayed - those further down would be hidden by default - perhaps via a javascript/css reveal.

The order isn't specific.

Gentoo.org
- Get Started - Links straight to the first chapter of the handbook. I would suggest it explains how to choose which arch you need, and then links to the handbooks for each arch, rather than the current method of making people choose before they've read a single word.
- News
  - Security
  - GMN
  - Announcements
- Community
  - Forums
  - IRC
  - Mailing Lists
  - Report issues (Bugzilla)
  - Planet (Blogs)
  - Package DB
  - Vendors
  - Unofficial sites (Possible new page)
- Sponsors
- Get Involved
  - Report issues (Bugzilla)
  - Help wanted (Staffing needs)
  - Forums
  - IRC
  - Mailing Lists
  - Adopt-a-dev
- About
  - About Gentoo
  - Philosophy
  - Social Contract
  - Name & Logo Guidelines
  - Graphics
  - Screenshots
- Documentation
  - Handbook
  - All docs (list.xml)
  - IBM Archive
  - GMN
  - GLEPs
- Get Gentoo (Download)
  - Mirrors
  - Torrents
- Developer List
- Package DB
- Store
- Contact Us
- Donate
- Projects

(Have I ever mentioned how much I hate forum markup for lists?)

d2_racing · Post by **d2_racing** » Sun Nov 30, 2008 5:14 am

Why not, the site maybe need an update to 2009

Stupendoussteve · Post by **Stupendoussteve** » Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:11 am

Even better, lets make the whole thing Flash based, and update to 2011!

We can even change our logo to a volume knob at 11 and a bunch of random kernel code around it, to let everyone know how futuristic we are!

How well does javascript/css reveal work in non-graphical browsers? May be something to look at before getting into purdyness, though it looks like Ubuntu manages it alright. IMO the site is great, it has worked well since the beginning. People these days are too into "interactivity".

I do agree that reorganizing the categories and sublinks is not a bad idea.

Paapaa · Post by **Paapaa** » Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:55 am

I agree 100%. The front page is a mess. Looks ugly and messy. Too many links with litlle grouping. And we have navigation menus BOTH top and left. That looks stupid.

We need less links with better grouping. The OP has many good ideas! Now we need someone to actually make a working proposal...

96140 · Post by **96140** » Sun Nov 30, 2008 8:56 pm

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:21 pm

nightmorph wrote:Some interesting ideas, though it'd be better to kick out the duplicate links. We already have a few too many duplicate links in our navstrips as it is.

Also, don't put "GMN" under "Documentation." The two have nothing to do with each other. Seems to be a common misconception; the only thing the two projects share is a key developer (me).

Overall, I do kinda like the reorganization of resources.

I put it under there because the newsletter often contains useful tips or other information I (and as such I guess other users) consider to be "documentation". While it may not be full guides, it's still documentation of a sort, IMO. "Documentation" in this case isn't referring to the documentation project, but just documentation from a users point of view, no matter the source.

This kind of sums up one of the biggest problems I see with the current structure - it's written from a developers point of view, from the pov of someone who knows most of the parts of Gentoo and knows exactly what they're looking for. I suspect this isn't the case for a large number of the website users.

dalek · Post by **dalek** » Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:14 am

I have to add this. I been a Gentoo user a long while. I joined this forum a few days before starting my install. I rarely use fgo since I can't ever seem to find anything. I use links that people provide on the mailing lists or in the forums. Sometimes I think fgo needs a site map. I can't seem to find what I need even if I use Google to help me search. Maybe there is some magic starting place that I have missed or something.

It does need to be more user friendly. If you are a developer then you know where to look but even some of us that have been using Gentoo for a while have trouble finding things.

My $0.02 worth.

node_one · Post by **node_one** » Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:25 pm

AllenJB wrote:...
Unofficial sites (Possible new page)
...

I think it would be nice if such a page existed.

tom_bxl · Post by **tom_bxl** » Mon Dec 01, 2008 7:17 pm

Under "News", I would also add a category "Flash"; just to put some quick and general site info such as "The GMN of October is skipped.", "The wiki site is unavailable", "The package page is not currently not being updated due to technical reasons"; no need of details or explanations. Just to let the community know that something is (not) happening.

Kollin · Post by **Kollin** » Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:02 pm

And it`ll be cool to integrate wiki within, something like that:

1.Gentoo documentation approved from the devs (thats current docs tab) will be "gentoo-wiki-stable".
2.Current wiki will become "gentoo-wiki-testing"

Of course articles will be possible to migrate in both directions 2 <---> 1
One article can be present in 1 (as approved to work) and 2 (with a little more kinky stuff within )
Users will be possible to contribute only to 2.
It`ll be better forum registration to be valid for bugzilla an wiki too

Just my 2 cents

djdunn · Post by **djdunn** » Mon Dec 01, 2008 11:01 pm

i would like something that would look awesome with firefox and links or another non graphical browser

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:17 am

Kollin wrote:And it`ll be cool to integrate wiki within, something like that:

1.Gentoo documentation approved from the devs (thats current docs tab) will be "gentoo-wiki-stable".
2.Current wiki will become "gentoo-wiki-testing"

Of course articles will be possible to migrate in both directions 2 <---> 1
One article can be present in 1 (as approved to work) and 2 (with a little more kinky stuff within )
Users will be possible to contribute only to 2.
It`ll be better forum registration to be valid for bugzilla an wiki too

Just my 2 cents

I dislike this suggestion. Two copies of an article would get confusing for starters.

The "promotion" system was already suggested in the various discussions that went on about an official wiki, but I dislike that too. Why should contributors lose editorial control over an article just because they wrote a good article? It's a stupid system that completely fails to get the point of wikis.

You'd end up discouraging some of your most useful contributors because they keep losing editorial control over their articles (and they don't want to or can't become moderators or higher level editors).

Kollin · Post by **Kollin** » Tue Dec 02, 2008 9:15 am

AllenJB wrote: Why should contributors lose editorial control over an article just because they wrote a good article? It's a stupid system that completely fails to get the point of wikis.

You'd end up discouraging some of your most useful contributors because they keep losing editorial control over their articles (and they don't want to or can't become moderators or higher level editors).

Contributor will lose control only on 'stable' article but not on 'testing' one.

I think it like software in portage : You have few testing versions then one stable (thats safe for general use) then again testing versions then stable again ...etc.What i meen is the contributor writes un article, it evolves, becoms useble and one day it`s ready for newbies then it`s fixed on stable branch, buut developing continues on testing branch.When it raches a new level of stability the stable branch is ubtated etc.

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:11 am

Kollin wrote:
AllenJB wrote: Why should contributors lose editorial control over an article just because they wrote a good article? It's a stupid system that completely fails to get the point of wikis.

You'd end up discouraging some of your most useful contributors because they keep losing editorial control over their articles (and they don't want to or can't become moderators or higher level editors).
Contributor will lose control only on 'stable' article but not on 'testing' one.

I think it like software in portage : You have few testing versions then one stable (thats safe for general use) then again testing versions then stable again ...etc.What i meen is the contributor writes un article, it evolves, becoms useble and one day it`s ready for newbies then it`s fixed on stable branch, buut developing continues on testing branch.When it raches a new level of stability the stable branch is ubtated etc.

Yes, exactly. The stbale article will; then become out of date as soon as the contributor updates the unstable article. I really don't see the point in having two copies of an article. A well maintained wiki will spot malicious or incorrect edits relatively quickly anyway. What happens when the contributor makes a mistake, the article gets made stable, then the contributor corrects the mistake. Now your "stable" article is incorrect, but the unstable one isn't. For users this then brings up confusion over which version they should use.

Unstable software in portage is a completely different situation because maintainers never lose editorial control over the packages. That won't be the case here.

You also have the problem with your system that, due to various issues, there might be no moderators stabilising articles for a while (which isn't exactly unlikely, given the ongoing manpower issues in Gentoo). Meanwhile the "unstable" article is continually updated and corrected. Now the "stable" article is out of date and won't work with the latest versions or lacks key useful information. Again, more confusion over which version to use.

And I still think contributors would be discouraged about losing editorial control over the "stable" copy of their article.

The entire system is frankly unnecessary and creates a lot of work for moderators / admins and discourages contributors.

dirk_salewski · Post by **dirk_salewski** » Tue Dec 02, 2008 12:06 pm

Stupendoussteve wrote:How well does javascript/css reveal work in non-graphical browsers?

That depends on the webdesigner. It's perfectly possible to write javascript/css-based menus for graphical browsers while retaining perfect compatibility and functionality-equal output for lynx/links/firefox+noscript. From the same source. It's done rather seldom, but it's neither hard nor impossible.

micr0c0sm · Post by **micr0c0sm** » Tue Dec 02, 2008 5:18 pm

Wasn't there a redesign contest a year or two ago, and a winner was chosen, and then it was never implemented?

If someone really wanted this done, they could mirror the gentoo site, setup a contest showing what the site would look like with different designs, and then all the council or web team or whoever is in charge would have to do is to cp the files. Kind of like how gentoo-wiki.com/info is also unofficial.

jsn · Post by **jsn** » Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:16 pm

I think the current webpage is not that bad as people sometimes say. Anyhow, i do like idea of re-organizing the actual menu/menu items, as i'm usually myself lost in them.

I did very slight edit of current webpage front. Dropdown menus are bit so-so, its nice to have all links instantly around, anyhow i probably add some menu buttons/drop down on the top location too just to see how it would go on. I was thinking more like some nice and smooth image on the top area, but i was too tired to make one for now.

My code is basicly done with css/html and with divs. may contain some oddities but works atleast with firefox 3

There's min-height in use (just to deal with floats easier), that doesnt work in every browser if I recall correctly.

It wasnt too bad on links tho

http://feedimage.info/gentoo/

If someone got offended me copying those images/page partly on my own server for a moment, please let me know and I'll delete it instantly.

This is basicly just for curiosity, I have no idea who deals with gentoo webpages. So I'm sorry again if this cause/d some anger.

Oh btw, some colors are bit off, as i said i'm very tired at the moment.

ArneBab · Post by **ArneBab** » Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:12 pm

I'd wish to have an easy way to geta t the code of all the core utilities and of the portage tree from the website.

A link to http://anoncvs.gentoo.org/ under "Contributing" would help a lot!

(If it's there and I missed it every time, that sets a point for "the site needs to get more user-friendly", regardless of my link locating abilities

)

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Mon Dec 22, 2008 11:11 am

I've submitted patches for this as [bug=252157]bug #252157[/bug]. You can currently see how this will look at http://gentoowww.allenjb.me.uk

d2_racing · Post by **d2_racing** » Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:56 pm

Hi, I like the new layout

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:31 pm

Just to let everyone know this is basically implemented on http://gentoo.org/index2.xml - which is currently waiting on some other stuff (which I'm in the process of chasing up because it doesn't look like it's been touched in about 3 months).

ArneBab · Post by **ArneBab** » Wed Dec 31, 2008 10:42 pm

Coul you add "sourcecode" to "Get involved" with a link to anoncvs/anonsvn/anongit?

AllenJB · Post by **AllenJB** » Thu Jan 01, 2009 12:58 am

ArneBab wrote:Coul you add "sourcecode" to "Get involved" with a link to anoncvs/anonsvn/anongit?

I'd suggest you file a bug to get further changes made as it's all in the hands of the Gentoo Devs now (while I could file one, I think me filing a bug for changes you want is bit silly).

If you want to be ultra helpful and submit a patch, the relevent repo is at http://sources.gentoo.org -> "gentoo" -> xml/htdocs/xsl/menu.xml ( http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/ge ... l/menu.xml ) - neysx did some further reshuffling of the code than I originally proposed and split out the menu to its own file.

minor_prophets · Post by **minor_prophets** » Thu Jan 01, 2009 1:56 am

Stupendoussteve wrote:Even better, lets make the whole thing Flash based, and update to 2011!

We can even change our logo to a volume knob at 11 and a bunch of random kernel code around it, to let everyone know how futuristic we are!

How well does javascript/css reveal work in non-graphical browsers? May be something to look at before getting into purdyness, though it looks like Ubuntu manages it alright.

I just *know* <sniff, sniff> links <sniff,sniff> won't like this. I just know it <sniff, sniff>.

ArneBab · Post by **ArneBab** » Thu Jan 01, 2009 8:37 pm

AllenJB wrote:
ArneBab wrote:Coul you add "sourcecode" to "Get involved" with a link to anoncvs/anonsvn/anongit?
I'd suggest you file a bug to get further changes made as it's all in the hands of the Gentoo Devs now (while I could file one, I think me filing a bug for changes you want is bit silly).

I just did: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=253384

If you want to be ultra helpful and submit a patch, the relevent repo is at http://sources.gentoo.org -> "gentoo" -> xml/htdocs/xsl/menu.xml ( http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/ge ... l/menu.xml ) - neysx did some further reshuffling of the code than I originally proposed and split out the menu to its own file.

A full patch might have been a bit over the top - I just posted a line which should be added.

Ideas for Gentoo Website

Ideas for Gentoo Website

Re: Ideas for Gentoo Website